---

Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill

I agree with my hon. Friend. If there is a physiological change, and the court judgment accepts that, in my estimation that amounts to a loss of faculty, which should be compensatable. As I said earlier, people say that pleural plaques are widespread in the general population. Others say that they are not altogether related to exposure to asbestos. Hugh Robertson, the director of social insurance for the TUC, sent me a copy of an e-mail, which I shall read out to the Minister. It states:"““I have today spoken to both Professor Mark Britton, and Professor Tony Newman Taylor. They are probably the most pre-eminent chest physicians in the UK and world renowned experts on asbestos-related diseases. Both confirmed that Pleural Plaques were not prevalent in the general male population and were an indicator of asbestos exposure (either occupational or environmental).""Mark said that his estimate would be that around 3-4 per cent. of X-Rays might show Pleural Plaques, although in areas of high exposure, such as East London, the figures would be higher.""Tony confirmed the strong link between asbestos exposure and Pleural Plaques, although he indicated that it was impossible to say absolutely that asbestos was the only cause, although there is no evidence of any other cause. It is widely held that asbestos ""exposure is the cause of Pleural Plaques. I have never heard this doubted before, although there is speculation that smoking may make Plaques more likely.””" That was the view of Professor Tony Newman Taylor who, at one point, was chair of the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council. The e-mail continues:"““You may be interested to know that about a third to one half of those occupationally exposed to asbestos will have calcified pleural plaques thirty years after first exposure. After twenty years, 5 to 15 per cent. will have uncalcified pleural plaques””." In other words, there is clear medical evidence that pleural plaques are the result of exposure to asbestos.